Hi Khali, On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 11:03:04 +0100, you wrote: >> As far as Chassis Intrusion (CI) goes, I've coerced an unused IN >> limit for time being as all I need is a write-only trigger event. > >This is no good. We made the interface such that user-space can guess >what any chip does and how to access it without any chip-specific >knowledge. If you implement chassis intrusion, please make it a separate >file with a dedicated, explicit name. Okay, current plan is to add the chassis_clear sysfs option, implementation unlikely as pointed out by Mark but documented in case we go there. Still need analog output -- two candidates in use plus pwm0 option, just a choice of which way to go, decision can wait for agreement. Cheers, Grant.
